A Pseudo-Likelihood Approach to Linear Regression with Partially Shuffled Data

Martin Slawski; Guoqing Diao; Emanuel Ben-David

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1910.01623

A Pseudo-Likelihood Approach to Linear Regression with Partially Shuffled Data

Martin Slawski·Guoqing Diao·Emanuel Ben-David

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Recently, there has been significant interest in linear regression in the situation where predictors and responses are not observed in matching pairs corresponding to the same statistical unit as a consequence of separate data collection and uncertainty in data integration. Mismatched pairs can considerably impact the model fit and disrupt the estimation of regression parameters. In this paper, we present a method to adjust for such mismatches under ``partial shuffling" in which a sufficiently large fraction of (predictors, response)-pairs are observed in their correct correspondence. The proposed approach is based on a pseudo-likelihood in which each term takes the form of a two-component mixture density. Expectation-Maximization schemes are proposed for optimization, which (i) scale favorably in the number of samples, and (ii) achieve excellent statistical performance relative to an oracle that has access to the correct pairings as certified by simulations and case studies. In particular, the proposed approach can tolerate considerably larger fraction of mismatches than existing approaches, and enables estimation of the noise level as well as the fraction of mismatches. Inference for the resulting estimator (standard errors, confidence intervals) can be based on established theory for composite likelihood estimation. Along the way, we also propose a statistical test for the presence of mismatches and establish its consistency under suitable conditions.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME cs.LG stat.ML

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Martin Slawski, Guoqing Diao, Emanuel Ben-David. 2019-10-03. A Pseudo-Likelihood Approach to Linear Regression with Partially Shuffled Data. https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.01623

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗